What do you consider proof of God, if anything?

[geometer]

I thought that the teaching was that one unrepented mortal sin, such as taking a bite from a hot dog on a Friday in Lent, sends a person to eternal fire in hell, regardless of whatever good he did before?
And for the plenary indulgence, the Church has that power according to the authority to bind and loose, is what I thought.

This kind of talk always seemed way beyond the limit to me. But, I heard a history program that said that one of the Popes told everyone to eat fish on fridays as a way to save the fishing industry which was in trouble at the time…

 

[1holycatholic]

This kind of talk always seemed way beyond the limit to me. But, I heard a history program that said that one of the Popes told everyone to eat fish on fridays as a way to save the fishing industry which was in trouble at the time…

Abstinence
Friday

From the dawn of Christianity, Friday has been signalized as an abstinence day, in order to do homage to the memory of Christ suffering and dying on that day of the week. The “Teaching of the Apostles” (viii), Clement of Alexandria (Stromata VI.75), and Tertullian (On Fasting 14) make explicit mention of this practice. Pope Nicholas I (858-867) declares that abstinence from flesh meat is enjoined on Fridays. There is every reason to conjecture that Innocent III (1198-1216) had the existence of this law in mind when he said that this obligation is suppressed as often as Christmas Day falls on Friday (De observ. jejunii, ult. cap. Ap. Layman, Theologia Moralis, I, iv, tract. viii, ii). Moreover, the way in which the custom of abstaining on Saturday originated in the Roman Church is a striking evidence of the early institution of Friday as an abstinence day.
There is no requirement to eat fish, only to abstain from carne.

 

[liquidpele]

Abstinence
Friday

From the dawn of Christianity, Friday has been signalized as an abstinence day, in order to do homage to the memory of Christ suffering and dying on that day of the week. The “Teaching of the Apostles” (viii), Clement of Alexandria (Stromata VI.75), and Tertullian (On Fasting 14) make explicit mention of this practice. Pope Nicholas I (858-867) declares that abstinence from flesh meat is enjoined on Fridays. There is every reason to conjecture that Innocent III (1198-1216) had the existence of this law in mind when he said that this obligation is suppressed as often as Christmas Day falls on Friday (De observ. jejunii, ult. cap. Ap. Layman, Theologia Moralis, I, iv, tract. viii, ii). Moreover, the way in which the custom of abstaining on Saturday originated in the Roman Church is a striking evidence of the early institution of Friday as an abstinence day.
There is no requirement to eat fish, only to abstain from carne.

It is very odd to me that fish are not considered meat in this day and age. I suppose the reasons are simply traditions at this point?

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Dear Catholic Exchange:

I understand why we don’t eat meat on Friday’s during Lent, but why is fish not considered meat?

Thanks,

Ann Marie Thompson

Dear Ann Marie,

Peace in Christ!

Biologically speaking, fish is meat. However, fish has not always been considered ‘meat.’ The word meat is often used to refer specifically to the flesh-meat of mammals and birds. For example, many cookbooks put meat and fish in different categories without specifying ‘flesh meat.’ Even in many modern languages, such as Spanish, the word for meat (carne) does not include fish.

James Akin (of Catholic Answers) gives a fuller explanation of this practice at the Nazareth Resource Library.

I hope this answers your question. If you have further questions on this or would like more information about Catholics United for the Faith, please contact us at 1-800-MY-FAITH (693-2484). Please keep us in your prayers as we endeavor to “support, defend, and advance the efforts of the teaching Church.”

United in the Faith,

 

[Jean_Anthony]

The topic is not the Friday penance and mortal sin. Please take that discussion to a new or existing thread in the appropriate forum. Thank you all.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

I would argue that abstaining from meat on Friday is proof of God, because God in his infinite wisdom through His Church encourages us to eat less red meat. Even modern science confirms that just about anything but candy is better for you than red meat.

Even popcorn is better.

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

I would argue that abstaining from meat on Friday is proof of God, because God in his infinite wisdom through His Church encourages us to eat less red meat. Even modern science confirms that just about anything but candy is better for you than red meat.

Even popcorn is better.

I agree!:clapping::bounce::extrahappy: Love of Christ Nancy

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

God Knows Me
June 17, 2009

“O lord, thou hast searched me, and known me.” (Psalm 139:1)

Perhaps the most frightening attribute of God is that He knows everything about us. Everything! He has “searched” (literally “penetrated”) us and “known” (“understood”) us. And since God is both omnipresent and omniscient, it obviously follows that nothing escapes His conscious knowledge about us. He observes our ordinary activities (v. 2) and our innermost thoughts. “Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways” (v. 3). The Hebrew word translated “compassest” suggests that He actually sees the formation of the words in our tongues before we begin to speak them (v. 4). That means that we are transparent to Him; we cannot deceive Him in any way. He knows what we are going to think; we cannot hide anything from Him. God knows what only we know about ourselves, and those things we won’t even admit to ourselves.

Furthermore, He is everywhere around each one of us (vv. 7-10), wherever we are or could be. He fills all space, and there is no escape. We cannot hide from God. He is wherever we go. The apostle Paul once observed: “For in him we live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28). This very intimate and complete knowledge about us is what makes God’s salvation such a marvelous matter. “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:6-8). God loves us in spite of what we have become. Yet, since He knows what we could be, He gives us eternal life through His Son so that we will realize, one day, what He knows we shall be. HMM

 

[SimonArizona]

“God enters by a private door into every individual.”

People who whole-heartedly believe in God do so not because someone said so, like the way we believe in dead presidents-because the history books tell us so.

The Bible with all its wisdom and insight about life, would not convince me whole-heartedly that God exists and actually interacts in my life.

God has this way of making himself known to the believer. He has this way of confirming that what the Book says about Him is so by proving himself to those who “test me and see if I do not answer you”-the Lord

Those who search for him, they find him.

it is intimate.

He remains hidden from those who don’t want him. Thats why there is no unquestionable proof for us.

God is such that a person cannot take knowledge of Him by force, they must ask and receive from Him. Similar to how a person must ask how you are doing or what you are doing, would you be intimate with your enemies or your friends only?

 

[4Horsemen]

I thought that the teaching was that one unrepented mortal sin, such as taking a bite from a hot dog on a Friday in Lent, sends a person to eternal fire in hell, regardless of whatever good he did before?
And for the plenary indulgence, the Church has that power according to the authority to bind and loose, is what I thought.

True, but as God is the final Judge, we don’t really know how He will judge in His Divine Mercy. St. Faustina tells us in her diary (she’s the saint to whom the Lord revealed His Divine Mercy–that the Sunday after Easter it should be celebrated). To me, this great Mercy is proof enough of His Love, His goodness, His Being–that is, existing as the Other, the One we desire. Union with God is our ultimate goal. Do we need scientific evidence?

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

True, but as God is the final Judge, we don’t really know how He will judge in His Divine Mercy. St. Faustina tells us in her diary (she’s the saint to whom the Lord revealed His Divine Mercy–that the Sunday after Easter it should be celebrated). To me, this great Mercy is proof enough of His Love, His goodness, His Being–that is, existing as the Other, the One we desire. Union with God is our ultimate goal. Do we need scientific evidence?

HI 4Horsemen, just in case someone might have forgot to greet you or even if they haven’t Welcome to CAF You are Loved Nancy

 

[jean8]

HI! my proof of God is Love, Love is all around you It is here and it is in you, and by the way Father God has a sence of humor to! He made me, and he laughed alot He ma de tears and all thing’s that fit into our situations. How splended our God is How wonderful, how natural, loving and kind. He gave us voice and thought, and sent his Son for insperation, and most of all forgiveness, and that is such a good feeling. it is so wonderful to know we are not just placed here to suffer and die, No! we are redeemed and we are fighting for the prize, none of our suffering is in vain, I offer all my prayers, works, joy’s. and suffering’s to the Lord, for I cannot ever repay him for all he has done for such a worm as I. In Jesus name I say and give you witness this day! Love is everything! God is Love. Come to me all you who are heavy laden and I will give you rest, Take my yoke upon you, for my yoke is easy and my burdens Light! God is Here! Praise The Lord AMEN! Love of Christ Nancy

nancy,
We walk by faith, not proof. if God had to prove he was, he would be an Idol.
See Eph.2:8-9 Our faith is a gift from God. Which you seem to have received.

Jesus said to the woman at the well, "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.
Only the Messiah can give this gift.

God bless,
jean

 

[jean8]

“God enters by a private door into every individual.”

People who whole-heartedly believe in God do so not because someone said so, like the way we believe in dead presidents-because the history books tell us so.

The Bible with all its wisdom and insight about life, would not convince me whole-heartedly that God exists and actually interacts in my life.

God has this way of making himself known to the believer. He has this way of confirming that what the Book says about Him is so by proving himself to those who “test me and see if I do not answer you”-the Lord

Those who search for him, they find him.

it is intimate.

He remains hidden from those who don’t want him. Thats why there is no unquestionable proof for us.

God is such that a person cannot take knowledge of Him by force, they must ask and receive from Him. Similar to how a person must ask how you are doing or what you are doing, would you be intimate with your enemies or your friends only?

simon,
Good post.

God bless you ,
jean

 

[Charlemagne_II]

One of the many “proofs” for God is in all the saints who have served Him so well in this world. In a world or in a community without religious people in it, it’s difficult to find compassion for those in need. But religion impels us to that compassion. Think, for example, of Damien of Molokai, who will be canonized a saint in October. It is difficult to find men without religion who will do for lepers what he did. When atheists complain about the corruption in religion, they are right to do so. But their willingness to overlook all the good done by the Church since its foundation, and their willingness to overlook the absence of proof that atheism has done much good for the world, is a sign to me that if the true is aligned fundamentally with the good and the beautiful, then it is a beautiful truth that there is a God.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Damien

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

One of the many “proofs” for God is in all the saints who have served Him so well in this world. In a world or in a community without religious people in it, it’s difficult to find compassion for those in need. But religion impels us to that compassion. Think, for example, of Damien of Molokai, who will be canonized a saint in October. It is difficult to find men without religion who will do for lepers what he did. When atheists complain about the corruption in religion, they are right to do so. But their willingness to overlook all the good done by the Church since its foundation, and their willingness to overlook the absence of proof that atheism has done much good for the world, is a sign to me that if the true is aligned fundamentally with the good and the beautiful, then it is a beautiful truth that there is a God.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_Damien

One word “LOVE”

 

[Ignatius]

I’m curious what people consider as proof that there is a God.

Can You Prove God Exists?

Before we answer this question, we must distinguish five questions that are often confused.

• First, there is the question of whether something exists or not. A thing can exist whether we know it or not.
• Second, there is the question of whether we know it exists. (To answer this question affirmatively is to presuppose that the first question is answered affirmatively, of course; though a thing can exist without our knowing it, we cannot know it exists unless it exists.)
• Third, there is the question of whether we have a reason for our knowledge. We can know some things without being able to lead others to that knowledge by reasons. Many Christians think God’s existence is like that.
• Fourth, there is the question of whether this reason, if it exists, amounts to a proof. Most reasons do not. Most of the reasons we give for what we believe amount to probabilities, not proofs. For instance, the building you sit in may collapse in one minute, but the reliability of the contractor and the construction materials is a good reason for thinking that very improbable.
• Fifth, if there is a proof, is it a scientific proof, a proof by the scientific method, i.e., by experiment, observation, and measurement? Philosophical proofs can be good proofs, but they do not have to be scientific proofs.

I believe we can answer yes to the first four of these questions about the existence of God but not to the fifth. God exists, we can know that, we can give reasons, and those reasons amount to proof, but not scientific proof, except in an unusually broad sense.
There are many arguments for God’s existence, but most of them have the same logical structure, which is the basic structure of any deductive argument. First, there is a major premise, or general principle. Then, a minor premise states some particular data in our experience that come under that principle. Finally, the conclusion follows from applying the general principle to the particular case.
In each case the conclusion is that God exists, but the premises of the different arguments are different. The arguments are like roads, from different starting points, all aiming at the same goal of God. In subsequent essays we will explore the arguments from cause and effect, from conscience, from history.

There is more from Peter Kreeft here: peterkreeft.com/topics/gods-existence.htm

 

[bobzills]

Can You Prove God Exists?]

I think there are a few problems here:

1. What is meant by proof?
2. Will your proof show that the Christian Trinitarian God exists, or will it just prove that there is some unknown power in the universe.

 

[Ignatius]

Can You Prove God Exists?

Before we answer this question, we must distinguish five questions that are often confused.

• First, there is the question of whether something exists or not. A thing can exist whether we know it or not.
• Second, there is the question of whether we know it exists. (To answer this question affirmatively is to presuppose that the first question is answered affirmatively, of course; though a thing can exist without our knowing it, we cannot know it exists unless it exists.)
• Third, there is the question of whether we have a reason for our knowledge. We can know some things without being able to lead others to that knowledge by reasons. Many Christians think God’s existence is like that.
• Fourth, there is the question of whether this reason, if it exists, amounts to a proof. Most reasons do not. Most of the reasons we give for what we believe amount to probabilities, not proofs. For instance, the building you sit in may collapse in one minute, but the reliability of the contractor and the construction materials is a good reason for thinking that very improbable.
• Fifth, if there is a proof, is it a scientific proof, a proof by the scientific method, i.e., by experiment, observation, and measurement? Philosophical proofs can be good proofs, but they do not have to be scientific proofs.

I believe we can answer yes to the first four of these questions about the existence of God but not to the fifth. God exists, we can know that, we can give reasons, and those reasons amount to proof, but not scientific proof, except in an unusually broad sense.

There are many arguments for God’s existence, but most of them have the same logical structure, which is the basic structure of any deductive argument. First, there is a major premise, or general principle. Then, a minor premise states some particular data in our experience that come under that principle. Finally, the conclusion follows from applying the general principle to the particular case.
In each case the conclusion is that God exists, but the premises of the different arguments are different. The arguments are like roads, from different starting points, all aiming at the same goal of God. In subsequent essays we will explore the arguments from cause and effect, from conscience, from history.

There is more from Peter Kreeft here: peterkreeft.com/topics/gods-existence.htm

I think there are a few problems here:

1. What is meant by proof?

Explicitly addressed in my post above.

1. Will your proof show that the Christian Trinitarian God exists, or will it just prove that there is some unknown power in the universe.

That is a new question. We will deal with only one question at a time.

 

[QuickCat]

Seems to me that our apostle [Paul] makes a significant statement in Colossians 2:8

“BEWARE lest any man spoil you through PHILOSOPHY AND VAIN DECEIT, after the TRADITION OF MEN, AFTER THE RUDIMENTS OF THE WORLD, AND NOT AFTER CHRIST.”

Whatta ya think?

 

[1holycatholic]

Seems to me that our apostle [Paul] makes a significant statement in Colossians 2:8

“BEWARE lest any man spoil you through PHILOSOPHY AND VAIN DECEIT, after the TRADITION OF MEN, AFTER THE RUDIMENTS OF THE WORLD, AND NOT AFTER CHRIST.”

Whatta ya think?

Romans 1:19-21
For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.

That’s the definition of the philosophy known as natural theology.

Col 2:8
See to it that no one captivate you with an empty, seductive philosophy according to human tradition, according to the elemental powers of the world 3 and not according to Christ.

Instead of the truth in the philosophy of natural theology we are warned about empty, seductive philosophy instead of the true philosophy.

Acts 17:23
So he debated in the synagogue with the Jews and with the worshipers, and daily in the public square with whoever happened to be there.
Even some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers engaged him in discussion. Some asked, “What is this scavenger trying to say?” Others said, “He sounds like a promoter of foreign deities,” because he was preaching about ‘Jesus’ and ‘Resurrection.’
They took him and led him to the Areopagus and said, “May we learn what this new teaching is that you speak of? For you bring some strange notions to our ears; we should like to know what these things mean.” Now all the Athenians as well as the foreigners residing there used their time for nothing else but telling or hearing something new. Then Paul stood up at the Areopagus and said: "You Athenians, I see that in every respect you are very religious. For as I walked around looking carefully at your shrines, I even discovered an altar inscribed, ‘To an Unknown God.’ What therefore you unknowingly worship, I proclaim to you.
The obligation to know and understand the true philosophy is clearly noted in scripture. You seem to reject philosophy, which is impossible. Rejecting philosophy would be a vain, empty and seductive philosophy. Is that what you’re suggesting?